European History Professor Vjosa Musliu

Vrije Universiteit Brussel

The Age of Mass Migration 2021-2022
Age of Mass Migration: class overview
1. General theories on mass migration
• Three-level explanations: macro – meso – micro

2. Mass migration in the 19th century

• Trends and figures

3. Understanding 19th C mass migration

• The 19th century = a mobility transition?
• Scientific revision of mobility transition thesis
1. General theories on mass migration
 1.1. Macro explanations of mass migration
Assumption: socio-economic and political
inequalities between countries = crucial for
explaining migration
• They affect both the inception of migration and its
perpetuation

Based on a “Push and Pull” model of migration

• Focuses on the disparity in conditions between the
place of origin and the place of destination
• Push: induce people to leave their location (poverty,
political instability, religious intolerance,
environmental disasters)
• Pull: prompt people to move to a new location
(democratic climate, religious tolerance, booming
economy, job opportunities,…)
• Intervening obstacles: distance, knowledge, prior
migration patterns, migration policies,…
Where do immigrants in Belgium come from?
Nationality of registered foreigners in Belgium, 2007
(%)
België

25

20

15

10

0
ITA FR NL MAR E TUR D P GB GR

ITA=Italy; FR=France; NL=the Netherlands; MAR=Morocco; E=Spain; TUR=Turkey; D=Germany; P=Portugal;

GB=Great Britain; GR=Greece
 Is this pattern uniform?
Does it apply equally to all Belgian cities?
 Nationality of registered foreigners in selected Belgian municipalities, 2007 (%)
Antwerpen Gent

25 25

20 20

15 15

10 10

5 5

0 0
ITA FR NL MAR E TUR D P GB GR ITA FR NL MAR E TUR D P GB GR

Elsene Genk

25 50

20 40

15 30

10 20

5 10

0 0
ITA FR NL MAR E TUR D P GB GR ITA FR NL MAR E TUR D P GB GR

ITA=Italy; FR=France; NL=the Netherlands; MAR=Morocco; E=Spain; TUR=Turkey; D=Germany; P=Portugal; GB=Great Britain; GR=Greece
1.2. Meso explanations to mass migration
• Meso factors:
 chain migration, social and/or professional networks, information flows, transport
facilities (development of shipping routes, railway system,…) , ….
legal restrictions, government policies, employment schemes, …
 remittances (migrants abroad sending money home): facilitating migration of
poorer family/community members

 Migration = a web of social and spatial interactions

Chain migration helps explain why migration % oftentimes increase after a first wave of moderate
migration
 “Gastarbeiter” – 1950-1970
1.3. Micro explanations to mass migration
• Micro-level: household & individual characteristics
 age, gender, skills, family composition,…
 social, economic and cultural capital
 ”mobility” culture, and affective relations with migrant communities abroad
1.3. Micro explanations to mass migration
• Micro factors help explain:
 It is typically not the “poorest of the poor” who migrate
• There is a strong relationship between migration, poverty and its
alleviation
• … but poverty in itself may not be the main driver of migration
(nuancing of macro-patterns)

• The importance of individual and social characteristics

• Individual characteristics: age, gender, skills/education
• Social determinants: social milieu and networks
1. General theories on mass migration
• Migration is a complex phenomenon; it can only be explained by
integrating different levels of analysis (macro/meso/micro) and
by accounting for their interaction

• Migration is a social and spatial process

 Those processes happen via inter-personal contacts
 They are embedded in broader spatial interactions
 They are path dependent & self-reinforcing
 It is a selective process
 It creates migration circuits and patterns
Age of Mass Migration: class overview
1. General theories on mass migration
• Three-level explanations: macro – meso – micro

2. Mass migration in the 19th century

• Trends and figures

3. Understanding 19th C mass migration

• The 19th century = a mobility transition?
• Scientific revision of mobility transition thesis
2. Mass migration in the 19th century
(source: Lucassen & Lucassen, 2009)
2. Mass migration in the 19th century
Six forms of migration (Lucassen and Lucassen, 2009):
• Emigration = Migration from Europe to non-European destinations, including
colonial, overseas migration
• Immigration = Migration from other continents to Europe
• Colonization = Settlement in ‘empty’ or sparsely populated spaces within
Europe
• Predominantly rural settlement of the Russian forest and steppe zones
• Migration to cities = Movements to cities of more than 10,000 inhabitants,
predominantly from the countryside
• Seasonal migration = Seasonal work migration
• Soldiers and Sailors = Migration of sailors and soldiers
2. Mass migration in the 19th century
Immigratie naar V.S
Between 1850 and 1913: approx. 40 million people migrated from Europe
to the New World; US absorbed nearly 2/3
Homestead Act of 1862: Settlers were offered 160 acres of land free
provided they agreed to work it for 5 years.
Nikola Tesla, 1884 (Austro- Mari Curie 1893 (Poland – Albert Einstein 1933
Hungary  US) France) (Germany – US)

……………
Audrey Hepburn, 1948 Dua Lipa 1993 (Kosovo-
(Belgium – UK – US) UK)
US Open Border
Policy
(till 1880s)

Welcome to all!
No oppressive taxes, no expensive kings, no compulsory military service, no knouts (whips) in dungeons
2. Mass migration in the 19th century
• Macro: Economic conditions
• Push factors: land fragmentation, landlessness, low wages
• Pull factors: land abundance, high wages
 Trend towards wage convergence at the end of the 19th C (Hatton & Williamson)
• Macro: Political conditions
• Push factors: persecutions
• Pull factors: religious & political tolerance
• Meso: Transport advances & chain migration
• Chain migration: pioneers & followers: history matters (path-dependency)
• 30-50% migrated with prepaid tickets
• Active role of shipping companies & migration agents
• Micro: predominantly single, unskilled men
Liner Transatlantic Crossing Times in Days, 1838-1955

• Source: Stopford, M. (2009) Maritime Economics, Third Edition, London: Routledge .

 Selectivity in migration
• Individual characteristics
• Typically unskilled
• Male adults dominate (households only
feature as an important minority)
• Low parental wealth, high number of
children (inheritance laws)
Age of Mass Migration: class overview
1. General theories on mass migration
• Three-level explanations: macro – meso – micro

2. Mass migration in the 19th century

• Trends and figures

3. Understanding 19th C mass migration

• The 19th century = a mobility transition?
• Scientific revision of mobility transition thesis
3.1. The 19th century = a mobility
transition?
• 19th century Europe = characterised by unprecedented numbers &
distances of migration

• Wilbur Zelinksi (1971): 19th century marks a mobility transition

• Modernisation thesis: industrialisation and the creation of a modern market
caused a break-up of traditional societies
• Main assumptions underlying thesis:
1. Pre-modern societies were stable and self-sufficient; limiting mobility
• People were only prepared to move when left no choice (disaster, war,
repressive regimes)
2. Industrialisation (and urbanisation/railways) (=modern societies) accelerated
mobility rates and expanded the geographical scope of migration
3.1. The 19th century = a mobility
transition?
• Wilbur Zelinksi (1971, 224) on “pre-modern traditional society”

“the life patterns of all but a few privileged or exceptional persons

are, or were, preordained (voorbestemd) by circumstances of birth.
Options of activities were rigidly constrained by gender and by
inherited class, caste, occupation, religion, and location. Barring
disaster, the orbit of physical movement was severely
circumscribed, and the feasible range of information and ideas was
narrow and stagnant, changing almost imperceptibly from
generation to generation”.
 3.1. The 19th century = a mobility
transition?
• In keeping with the modernisation paradigm, migration was conceived as
primarily:
• Push-driven
• New -> as in it has never happened before
• One-directional -> they moved to another country and stayed there permanently
• Originating from miserable living conditions
• Leading to a rural exodus -> massive movement of people from rural areas to urban
areas

→ A one-time transfer of population to (new) urban centers

→ A transition from agrarian to modern society
“Day after day, such travelers crept past, but always (…) in
one direction – always towards the town. Swallowed up in
one phase or other of its immensity, towards which they
seemed impelled by a desperate fascination, they never
returned. Food for the hospitals, the churchyards, the
prisons, the river, fever, madness, vice, and death – they
passed on to the monster, roaring in the distance, and were
lost.”

Charles Dickens (1820-1870), “Dombey & Son”, 1848

Fyi: Judith Flanders (2015) “The Victorian City: Everyday Life in Dicken’s London”.
3.2. The 19th century = a mobility
transition?
Important revisions to Wilbur Zelinksi’s (1971) thesis

1. Early modern period was less static than assumed

• There was seasonal migration, international labour market for soldiers and
sailors
• There were constant pull factors of cities (commerce, service work, crafts,
knowledge, …)
3.2. The 19th century = a mobility
transition?
Important revisions to Zelinski’s (1971) thesis:
2. Migration is not uni-directional
• There was considerable turnover (transition; incoming but also outgoing
migration) & a lot of return migration

3. High rate of return migration softens “break-up” of traditional,

agrarian societies
• Migration from rural to urban centers (and then to overseas areas)
• But migration did not automatically lead to “rootlessness”, “isolation” or
“marginality” in the recipient countries or in the sending communities
3.2. The 19th century = a mobility
transition?
Important revisions to Zelinski’s (1971) thesis:
Conclusion
 Industrialisation is not the prime cause of mass migration
in the 19th century in Europe
 But improvements in transportation, as the result of
industrialisation, played an important role in accelerating and
intensifying migration
3.2. The 19th century = a mobility
transition?
Example: Pooley & Turnbull (1998): studying family histories, they find
great stability in patterns of modern British migration (1750 till 1900)
• Although long distance migration increases throughout 19th century,
predominant pattern remains that of short-distance movements, typically
within the same region
• Especially skilled workers migrated greater distances
• No evidence of a real rural exodus: in addition to rural to urban migrations, also
evidence of return migration (urban to rural) and rural to rural migration
• Gender: female and male migration patterns overlap largely, suggesting they
may have travelled together
3.2. The 19th century = a mobility
transition?
• Migration does not only result from
industrialization (proletarisation,
wage labour)
• Dutch Republic = early leader in
European mobility (North Sea
system: high wages, international
labour market)
• Russia:
• even with its feudal regime, it was
much less static than often
presumed; Russian state-formation
promoted colonization and military
migration, weakness of state
allowed for slave trade
• end of serfdom (1861): boost of
seasonal migration, city migration,
long-distance emigration
3. Mobility transition thesis??
• Revisions to the “mobility transition” thesis
• Yes, a sharp increase in migration after 1850s (thanks to industrialisation and improvements
in transport facilities)
• Yes, there was a lot of migration from rural to urban areas

• No, ”newness” of migration should not be overstated

• No, the process of migration did not cause a complete breakdown of “traditional” societies
• Migration was not one-off, or uni-directional process
• Return migration evidences a respect and identification with traditional, origin
communities
4. Conclusion
• Migration = a complex social and spatial process
• Not simply push and pull explanations (macro inequalities); importance of meso and
micro explanations
• Meso and micro factors help explain why emigration were not always high for poor
countries or why not the “poorest of the poor” were most likely to migrate
• End of 19th C: migration slowed down as the result of:
• Wage convergence between the new and old worlds
• Rising xenophopia and policies restricting migration; creation of nationality laws; shift
towards positive selection mechanisms
Lemn Sissay – Ethiopian-British writer

https://badilishapoetry.com/lemn-sissay/#inline1
Questions to help you study
• We saw that migration is a complex “social” and “spatial” process. Explain.
• In the 1970s, scholars classified the 19th as a “mobility transition” period. Explain
this concept and elaborate on later revisions of the theory of “mobility transition”.
• What is the relationship between mass migration and industrialisation?
• Historical research has revised the modernization paradigm that defined 19th century
as a one-directional, one-time and push-driven phenomenon. Explain these
revisions.
• Can we explain 19th century migration by looking solely at macro-economic push and
pull factors? Why (not)?
• During the 19th century, emigration rates were not always highest for the poorest
countries. Explain this counter-intuitive finding.